Sign in to follow this  
graemeb

EvaSim Riga released

Recommended Posts

EvaSim has (finally) released scenery for Riga airport (Latvia):

http://secure.simmarket.com/evasim-riga-rix-fs2004.phtml

 

Has anyone been game to try this one? I'm afraid the screenshots do nothing to convince me to get this scenery, although I want to support FS9 developers. After my disappointment with Drzewiecki Design's UUEE I will wait for some feedback before getting this one.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Good morning, I have just purchased the scenery and will be back with some first impressions in the evening.

 

Harald

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The screens at simmarket are screaming "have seen better freeware" to me. :huh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"have seen better freeware"

 

... but unfortunately not for Riga :(

And I see nothing better in the future.

 

P.S.:

Btw, I have seen worse payware, too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


with some first impressions

 

Harald the suspense is killing me.  :unsure:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good morning folks,

 

was a little late yesterday, so here is my first report about EVRA Riga International by EVASim.

 

Meanwhile there is one 5star review at SimMarket, but it mentions the season switcher and thus seems to be for the FSX version.

And that leads me into the supposed main problem of this scenery: It seems to be a portover from a FSX scenery again. I don't know if that is the cause for my most important thing to report: FPS are even worse than with Drzewieckis UUEE.

 

But let me begin with the positive aspects. At first, it looks much, much better than the freeware we had until now. You must not expect a level equal to the best scenery designers. But it's quite comparable with sceneries by, let's say, SimBreeze or some pre-2012 TropicalSim stuff, and definitely better than some Blueprint products. Buildings and 3D objects are a little bricky, trees are quite old-fashioned, but it has phototerrain ground, clear buildings textures and some nice details, as construction sites and the museum (although made by some standard static models without showing the real Soviet models). Woods are also quite old fashioned made by some textured walls (comparable to FBS Da Nang cityscape); but between them there are old military installations.

 

Did I mention the nice winter effect? Hills of snow removed from the runways and aprons everywhere.

 

However, there is much to criticize. First thing is that some screenshots at simmarket seem to show the FSX version. The FS9 version has no people and only a downgraded version of the cars shown there. I also didn't see any "AI apron traffic", only static models. Otherwise, the screenshoots show quite well what you can expect, so I didn't make more shots.

 

Ironically, the FSX object libraries seem to be included. There are two huge files which names leaded me to this conclusion and whom I deactivated without any negative impact.

 

Furthermore, many textures show their FSX origin by having a huge size up to 21 Megabytes, and being in 2096x2096 format. I converted them testwise into 1048x1048 DXT3, but FPS didn't improve. It seems that the code of the 3D models itself causes that bad performance. I did some more tests deactivating other bgls but FPS didn't improve significantly as well.

Unfortunately, my knowledge isn't sufficient to find out which part of the scenery causes that big FPS drop; it seems that it's the terminal building itself. Also, I have no idea if this is a problem of CPU or GPU capacity (GPU is obviously the bottleneck of my system, but if the poor FPS are really caused by the terminal than it should be rather a problem of the CPU, shouldn't it?).

 

If I pan around in slew mode over remote areas of the airport with the stock Cessna, FS2004 performs well reaching the fixed 30 FPS. But as soon as the terminal comes into sight (or the airport as whole), FPS drop to 15 or even 10 FPS. I will explore what happens at a correct approach with a more complex plane soon (and then maybe post some screenshots).

 

So those of you with systems inferior to mine will probably have even worse FPS problems.

 

The scenery has a huge exclude area; I will try to find out if it can be made smaller.

 

What I have to mention is that if I read EVASims website and their blog, while they wanted to make a complete Riga City scenery, they were asked to pre-release the airport earlier. Beyond this, they state that it's their first scenery from which they hope to learn yet. I can only hope that there are some updates in the future not only to enhance the scenery area but to improve the performance, too.

 

What is most astonishing is the price. As we stated it's even higher than for the FSX version. Given the problems reported above, it's adequate for the optical impression of the airport but it's much too high if one considers the FPS problems which are - in my opinion - caused by a hastily portover from FSX (perhaps I'm wrong but then it's simply bad programming).

 

So as conclusion I can not recommend to buy the scenery in its current state for this price. Sorry!

Strange enough, I have a better overall feeling than with DDs UUEE.

Maybe the latter was a major disappointment due to high expectations from a established developer and a poor reaction to complaints.

 

I will write a mail to the developer with my findings.

 

EDIT: What I forgot to mention: I use tha Riga city scenery by RLTUGA82

http://www.avsim.su/f/fs2004-sceneries-44/staraya-riga-52978.html (of course its Landclass file removed)

and the Latvian airports by Andrey Anta

http://www.avsim.su/f/fs2004-scenarii-44/latviya-31413.html (of course its EVRA deactivated)

together with EVRA. I failed so far to test EVRA without these add-ons. But I frankly don't believe that this will improve the performance.

 

Regards,

Harald

 

P.S. Who will test Baku 2015?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Harald,

Thank you very much for your review. I think I shall stay away from this scenery for the moment. It is a shame as I was hoping for something special. Let's hope the developer can listen to criticism and try to fix it (unlike other unnamed developers).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many thanks Harald for a very thorough review of EVRA.

 

When priorities permit I will probably give-it-a-go since my 4770K should be able to cope ... if UUEE is any guide.

 

For that reason I shall put up my hand to assess BAKU next year ... seems only fair.  :rolleyes:

 

Thanks for providing the other, complimentary, links.  Again very thoughtful of you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If only the Yekaterinburg crew would make some more FS9 ports. :(

 

Thankyou very much for your report Harald…..it would be good to see it on Simmarket too.  :wink:

 

I will pass. I'm looking forward to Prestwick.  :smile:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For that reason I shall put up my hand to assess BAKU next year ... seems only fair.

 

o.k., Looking forward! (We will not forget...)

 

 

 

 it would be good to see it on Simmarket too

 

This will happen after a test without the add-ons mentioned above and after contacting EVASim directly, depending from their answer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good evening,

 

I made a flight EYSA - EVRA and experienced exactly 8 FPS at approach in quite heavy weather and with complete AI traffic.

 

Also, I wrote to the developer to suggest that he should improve the scenery performance-wise. I did remark the false screenshots which actually show the FSX version, too. I'm eager to read a reaction.

 

Meanwhile, I banned this one from my FS installation, at least temporarily.

 

Harald

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A word to the wise ain't necessary - it's the stupid ones that need the advice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


A word to the wise ain't necessary - it's the stupid ones that need the advice.

 

Profundity. Again.

 

gwillmot is on a roll !    :LMAO:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm. This Evasim is a most unusual devloper. On his blog  site he states:

 

"In case if you think that it is bad investment into EVASIM's scenery - never mind! Here is a better free alternative that you were happy to fly with for over a decade. Note that this is an add-on, free but anyway it is an add-on not a default stuff."

 

He then provides a link to the Mathew Ministry freeware scenery.

 

This does not bode well in terms of fixes and upgrades. Sounds like he will not be bothered. Very strange thing to do...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this